Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. MARCELO CALISO

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR No. 187049 2010-05-04	PEOPLE v. LITO MACAPANAS Y ECIJA VILLARAMA, JR., J.
For one (1) to be convicted of qualified rape, at least one (1) of the aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, must be alleged in the Information and duly proved during the trial.[47] In the case at bar, appellant used a sharp-pointed bolo locally known as sundang in consummating the salacious act. This circumstance was alleged in the Information and duly proved during trial. Being in the nature of a qualifying circumstance, "use of a deadly weapon" increases the penalties by degrees, and cannot be treated merely as a generic aggravating circumstance which affects only the period of the penalty. This so-called qualified form of rape committed with the use of a deadly weapon carries a penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. As such, the presence of generic aggravating and mitigating circumstances will determine whether the lesser or higher penalty shall be imposed. When, as in this case, neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstance attended the commission of the crime, the minimum penalty, i.e., reclusion perpetua, should be the penalty imposable pursuant to Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code.[48] Thus, both trial and appellate courts properly imposed on appellant the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
	GR NO. 166617 2007-07-03	PEOPLE v. AGUSTIN ABELLERA Y CAMANA CORONA, J.
Testimonies of victims of tender age are credible, more so if they are without any motive to falsely testify against their offender.[19] Their revelations that they were raped, coupled with their willingness to undergo public trial where they could be compelled to describe the details of the assault on their dignity by their own father, cannot be easily dismissed as concoctions.[20] It would be the height of moral and psychological depravity if they were to fabricate sordid tales of sexual defloration (which could put him behind bars for the rest of his life) if they were not true.[21]
	GR NO. 173050 2007-04-13	PEOPLE v. AC-MAD PANDAPATAN Y DIMALAPANG CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
For there to be qualified rape, at least one of the attendant circumstances mentioned in Article 335[38] must be alleged in the information and duly proved during the trial.[39] In the instant case, since the attendant circumstances of the victim's minority and her relationship with the offender have been properly alleged in the information and established during trial, the trial court's imposition of the penalty of death on appellant would have been justified.
	GR NO. 171020 2007-03-14	PEOPLE v. ALFREDO PANGILINAN Y TRINIDAD CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
For one to be convicted of qualified rape, at least one of the attendant circumstances mentioned in Article 335[65] must be alleged in the information and duly proved during the trial.[66] In the instant case, since the attendant circumstances of the victim's minority and her relationship with the offender have been properly alleged in the informations and established during trial, the trial court's imposition of the penalty of death on appellant is justified.
	GR NO. 168649 2006-12-06	PEOPLE v. JOSE ALVIZO AUDINE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
For one to be convicted of qualified rape, at least one of the aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code must be alleged in the information and duly proved during the trial.[44] In the instant case, since the special qualifying circumstances of the victim's minority and her relationship with the offender have been properly alleged in the informations and established during trial, the imposition of the death penalty for each count of rape is justified.
	GR NO. 166546 2006-09-26	PEOPLE v. ROGELIO ARSAYO Y LAVAQUIZ CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
For one to be convicted of qualified rape, at least one of the aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 266-B[51] of the Revised Penal Code must be alleged in the information, or in this case the criminal complaint, and duly proved during the trial.[52] In the instant case, since the special qualifying circumstances of the victim's minority and her relationship with the offender have been properly alleged in the criminal complaint and established during trial, the imposition of the penalty of death on appellant is justified.
	GR Nos. 143760-63 2003-06-23	PEOPLE v. ROMEO MANLUCTAO Y BLANCO QUISUMBING, J.
In these cases, the trial court gave full credence to complainant's testimony. We find on record that in three of the four cases, i.e. Criminal Cases Nos. 2000-0125-D, 2000-0126-D, and 2000-0128-D, private complainant testified as to the sexual abuses she suffered at appellant's hands in a clear, detailed, and categorical manner. Private complainant reveals in her testimony how her chastity was defiled by appellant. Her willingness to face police investigation and undergo a humiliating public trial speaks eloquently to the truth of her complaints. As previously held by this Court, a rape victim's testimony against her father is entitled to much credibility since respect for elders is deeply ingrained in Filipino children and is even recognized by law.[14] Thus, we agree with the trial court that the private complainant's testimony alone, having satisfied the test of credibility and sincerity, is sufficient basis for appellant's prosecution and conviction[15] in Criminal Cases Nos. 2000-0125-D, 2000-0126-D, and 2000-0128-D. A person accused of a crime may be convicted, not on the number of witnesses against him, but on the credibility of even one witness who is able to prove his guilt beyond a shadow of doubt.[16]